Young v. Demisch Danant, LLC
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:22-cv-08148
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Young v. Demisch Danant, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled-in-principle case without prejudice to timely restoration.
The order affected Lawrence Young, the other persons identified in the caption as similarly situated, and Demisch Danant, LLC. The opinion does not state whether a class was certified.
What happened
In Young v. Demisch Danant, LLC, the Court was told that the parties had settled the case in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims or settlement terms.
Judge Abrams ordered the action discontinued without costs to either side and without prejudice to restoring it if an application was made within 30 days. The Clerk was directed to close the case. The order also explains that any request for the Court to retain authority to enforce a settlement had to place the settlement terms on the public record and obtain the Court’s approval within that same period.
Judge Ronnie Abrams issued the order on November 21, 2022. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Young v. Demisch Danant, LLC · No. 1:22-cv-08148
- Ronnie Abrams
- Nov. 21, 2022
Background
The opinion states that the Court was informed that the case had been settled in principle. It does not provide the claims, the settlement terms, or any decision on the merits.
Order
The Court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the Court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. It stated that any application to reopen filed after that period could be denied solely because it was late.
The Court further stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the Court within the same 30-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Effect and Classification
This was a procedural order ending the action based on the reported settlement in principle, rather than a ruling on the underlying claims. The opinion does not state whether a class was certified, despite the caption’s reference to persons similarly situated.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.